Did the NRL judiciary get the Jordan McLean suspension right?

Talk about a tough call. The NRL judiciary's decision on the Alex McKinnon tackle is arguably the toughest the commitee has ever had to face.

It's a confusing area, which touches on both legal and ethical aspects of the game and its governance. Last night on Fox Sports, Sterlo and Matty Johns put their opposiing views forward - but what do you think?

Did the judiciary get it right or was the seven-week suspension too harsh? Should the judiciary take the consequences of the tackle into account or is this a step in the wrong direction? Have your say below.

Re: Did the NRL judiciary get the Jordan McLean suspension right?

I personally didn't like the ruling. But as everyone is saying, it was a lose-lose situation for the judiciary, scrutiny would be thrown at them in abundance either way.

The only reason I think they got it wrong, is because regardless of the lift or not, it WAS a horrible accident!

We have seen much much worse in that game alone, let alone other matches.

The NRL may have had an oppurtunity to say "Accidents Happen". Instead, it is now a guilty charge, and they have held McLean responsible.

You can argue both ways, which in terms is why its such a tough call. The argument for a guilty charge is understandable and the argument for a not guilty charge is also understandable.

The only problem I have with it at the moment is that injuries shouldn't particulary affect the grading, needs to be black and white, the tackle is the tacke. This is simply tragic that the result of this tackle went so wrong.

The tackle in the Warriors V Tigers match was bad, and luckily we don't have two young men in hospital at the moment.

Re: Did the NRL judiciary get the Jordan McLean suspension right?

The Storm are taught this takle by their coaches to hold the players upright and act like a fulcrum , then the third player attacks the legs and lifts. We've got to make the rules so as to stop the player getting lifted or tilted into a bad position. All 3 storm players knew that tackle and were well rehersed . The object is to harm the player by driving him as hard as possible into the turf. That is how I saw it and it's about time the Storm owe up to the fact that they are coached to do this. The Lifting takle after the player is immobilised cannot continue.Once the momentum has stopped , that's it call tacke. It's obvious that a third player can come in and takle around the legs but he should only be grabbing the legs to stop momentum and not in anyway lifting the legs or leg..